What were the major criticisms of SNAP before 1977 reforms?

1. The “purchase requirement” as a barrier: who paid to get help

A central pre‑1977 complaint was that households had to buy stamps — a requirement designed to tie coupons’ face value to the cost of a healthy diet — but that this up‑front purchase depressed take‑up by the poorest households; eliminating that purchase requirement became the rallying cry of reformers and was enacted in 1977 ^{[1] [2]}.

2. Patchwork access and administrative inconsistency

Before nationwide standardization, counties often ran commodity distribution programs instead of the stamp program, producing uneven access; reformers argued the system needed uniform national standards of eligibility and more federal support so benefits would reach minority and otherwise underserved communities ^{[1] [4]}.

3. Program identity: commodity transfer versus nutrition policy

Historically the program grew out of efforts to move surplus commodities; critics said the program’s institutional home and origins prioritized agribusiness interests and commodity disposition over nutrition goals, a tension that informed debates leading up to the 1977 changes that explicitly elevated nutrition in statutory language and program design ^{[3] [2]}.

4. Stigma, complexity and political messaging

Advocates pushing reform framed part of the problem as stigma and bureaucratic complexity deterring eligible families; Congress and the USDA cited concerns that simplifying administration and removing stigmatizing features would raise participation and better meet the goal of increasing access to a more nutritious diet ^{[2] [1]}.

5. Nutrition effectiveness: early doubts and competing views

Even as the program was recast in the 1970s toward nutrition, critics from different quarters questioned whether food stamps actually improved diet quality. Some public‑health voices pushed for stronger nutrition orientation; others argued the program’s design (including its lack of item‑level controls) limited its capacity to guarantee better nutrition — debates that continued after 1977 ^{[5] [6]}.

6. Political critiques from across the spectrum

Criticism came from both sides: some conservatives and market‑oriented analysts argued the program expanded dependence, had high administrative costs, and did not demonstrably reduce hunger or improve nutrition, while anti‑hunger advocates emphasized access, stigma, and nutrition goals — these competing agendas shaped legislative compromises in 1977 ^{[7] [3]}.

7. What the 1977 reforms specifically aimed to fix

The Food Stamp Act of 1977 eliminated the purchase requirement, established the Thrifty Food Plan as the basis of maximum benefits, called for uniform national eligibility standards, and increased federal support — all direct responses to the participation, equity, and administrative criticisms of the prior system ^{[1] [2] [4]}.

8. Limitations of available reporting and open questions

Current sources emphasize the purchase requirement, uneven county practices, and the program’s commodity origins as the main pre‑1977 criticisms, but available sources do not mention a comprehensive list of every contemporaneous critique (for example, detailed state‑by‑state opposition records or lobbying memos are not cited in these materials) ^{[1] [2]}. Researchers relying on these summaries should note that archival congressional debates and local county records would contain more granular objections and politics not detailed here ^{[2] [3]}.

Conclusion: The reforms in 1977 were driven by a focused set of criticisms—especially that the purchase requirement depressed participation and that the program lacked national uniformity—and broader disputes about whether the program served farm interests, reduced stigma, and genuinely improved nutrition; the legislative fixes directly mirrored those critiques ^{[1] [2] [3]}.